I found a new R-L21 in the Jewish R1b project with a Jewish surname Cohen with oldest known ancestor Marcus Cohen b. 1830 in Poland. He is not yet in the R-L21 project but I encouraged him to join. His FTDNA Kit# is 2842. Non-Baltic Cluster Jewish names are very few and far between in the R-L21 project (Kimhi in the Spanish group is a notable exception, and Cohen only differs at 385 being a slightly unusual 11-16). He only has 12 markers, but he doesn't match any confirmed R-L21 even at 12.

Thanks. That's a new one. I was just checking that project a few days ago, and I didn't see him.

I've gotten him to join the R-L21 Plus Project and to put in an order for 67 markers. He is currently listed in the "ungrouped" section.

I am aware of at least four in the cluster that have ordered L583, and at least two others that are not it the cluster that have also ordered a test. Results probably not back until August 1st.

Prager in the Baltic Cluster just showed up as negative for L583. He was GD 2 at 25 markers to me, but way off at 67. Guess we will have to wait to see if others in the cluster come up positive. Not aware of any others outside the cluster who are L583+.

I am aware of at least four in the cluster that have ordered L583, and at least two others that are not it the cluster that have also ordered a test. Results probably not back until August 1st.

Prager in the Baltic Cluster just showed up as negative for L583. He was GD 2 at 25 markers to me, but way off at 67. Guess we will have to wait to see if others in the cluster come up positive. Not aware of any others outside the cluster who are L583+.

Some additional L583 results have come in and it looks like L583 is not going to be a Baltic Cluster SNP identifier. Here is what I see listed in the R-L21 Plus Project SNPs:

At least it's not private which is what happens with a lot of SNPs found in WTY. What's the GD between those positive ?

GD is 3 at 37 markers, which is how many markers exist for Burde. I don't know if this is different enough to ever get L583 onto the ISOGG tree. There are no known existing family relationships. It would be nice to uncover a third positive somewhere.

At least it's not private which is what happens with a lot of SNPs found in WTY. What's the GD between those positive ?

GD is 3 at 37 markers, which is how many markers exist for Burde. I don't know if this is different enough to ever get L583 onto the ISOGG tree. There are no known existing family relationships. It would be nice to uncover a third positive somewhere.

Burde got his 67 marker test back, and we match exactly on 38-67 so still GD of 3 at 67 markers. The interesting thing is that he has a closer match (than me) at 65/67 markers with someone else, who I also match but at 63/67. We have convinced this person to test L583 and encourage to also join the R-L21 Plus Project to get put into the Baltic Cluster. Who knows, might be a third L583+ discovery...

I think SNP L583 is stable. Here is something interesting I had not paid attention to until tonight, now that I've gotten a look at the markers for this new potential L583 person - the three of us are the only ones in the Baltic Cluster who have WAMH modal value 444=12. All others in the Baltic Cluster who have tested 67 markers are off-modal 13, including the two that tested negative for L583 (Prager and Kabo). Maybe having value 12 for DYS 444 might be key to who may be positive. Also interesting is that Thierry (of Chateau-Thierry fame) also has 444=12. Maybe the Baltic Cluster isn't really a cluster. I'm having a real hard time believing L583 is only a couple hundred years old.

I think there is an easy explanation:1) all these Jewish R-L21 descend from a single person2) this person lived a few centuries ago3) as they have a cluster with many rare data, it is open the problem as when this person introgressed in the Jewish pool4) L583 is a private SNP for Yurzditsky and Burde, who are the closest amongst these individuals5) we can reconstruct the tree of this descent by using CDYa,b and it is worth only amongst these close persons, because like every marker mutates backwards and forwards. Mutations in other markers with a slow mutating rate could be used for creating some subclasters.

I think I may have stumbled upon something interesting: an Eastern European Ashkenazi R-L21* group or cluster with the following off-modal values -

388=11392=14459b=9464c=15

Opinions?

Hey, Rich... here is your original thread post. The potential third person of the L583+ club is not 464c=15, but rather 464c=16. Yes, I know, it's close and maybe a backward mutation, but it certainly breaks your original off-modal definition. I tend to agree with Maliclavelli about a single person spawning Baltic Cluster Jewish R-L21s somewhere in the past, but maybe this originator goes back much farther than we (or A. Klyosov) think and age of L583 is older as well.

Dear “seferhabahir”,who knows me knows that I have always fought against those who calculate the mutation rate like Klyosov, Nordtvedt, Vizachero (if he somewhere is always thinking to this stuff). This method could be worth for a short period, but not for a long one. The recent case of the hg. G found in prehistoric France demonstrates that for 5000 years ago the mutation rate should be multiplied for at least 2.5. For this I said in my previous posting: “as they have a cluster with many rare data, it is open the problem as when this person introgressed the Jewish pool”. I cannot exclude that it entered Palestine before the Diaspora.Certainly it is a little strange that many of these Jewish lines (above all Ashkenazic) descend from a single person with markers values out of the modal but none of the other Jews demonstrates to descend from that ancestor. We don’t find this either for this R-L21, nor for the G2c and many others. For this I have written in the past that these introgressions happened mostly in Medieval Italy or the Rhine Valley and the Ashkenazic Jews continue some haplogroups and some haplotypes which went extinct in the place of origin. But for being sure of this, some trace we should find and this is what I am searching for before I am sure of my ideas.This Jewish R-L21 cluster is very characterized:DYS388=11DYS392=14DYS459b=9 (this less characterising of the others)DYS464=15,15,15,17DYS590=9DYS487=14It isn’t a few.We can hypothesize something about the history of this haplogroup. Certainly it arose in North West Europe from an R-P312 and it is very ancient. It lacks completely in Italy (I think having demonstrated that the few cases found were of French descent or probably NPEs amongst Italian migrants in America). There is an unique case, that of Argiedude, but it is suspect it too. I can say, after so many persons tested, that it lacks completely in Italy, and it also demonstrates that all those migrations to Italy after the Roman Empire Fall didn’t change the Italian DNA set up. For this I’d be inclined to think that the introgression happened in the Rhine Valley or in the Baltic Region. It is in fact a little bit believable that it entered Palestine and not Italy during so many centuries of Roman Empire.

The Baltic Cluster is definitely a cluster; it stands out, easily visble amid the crowd of other haplotypes with its unique off-modal marker values. An individual cluster member who is off by one or two here or there doesn't alter that.

And I think Klyosov is right in his assessment of its age and probable origin.

And I think Gioiello is wrong about L21 being completely absent from Italy. It's obviously there: we have Italian L21s. One has to start making excuses - French immigrants, American NPEs - to explain them away.

I have found on SMGF a person, unfortunately anonymous, who probably belongs to this cluster and is linked with these Jews: KQ7G4.The closest to him (and to the other Jews) is probably the Brazilian Alves: 5EVW9.We can think:1) that this is really an ancient Jewish R-L21 and this Brazilian is a Sephardic2) that these Ashkenazic Jews are of Iberian descent and the origin of this R-L21 must be searched in Iberia, where R-L21 is present.

About the Italian R-L21 I am still waiting that Rich shows them to me. Argiedude is linked to a Calloway family and I hadn't any reply to my request of deeper tests.

The Baltic Cluster is definitely a cluster; it stands out, easily visble amid the crowd of other haplotypes with its unique off-modal marker values. An individual cluster member who is off by one or two here or there doesn't alter that.

I know it's a real cluster. It jumps out much more clearly than most of the things in R-L21. I was really hoping to find a defining SNP for it (and L583 isn't it). My "maybe not" comment was tongue-in-cheek. I did take the liberty to tell this person with 464a,b,c,d = 15-15-16-17 that they were definitely in the cluster, and would be allowed into the R-L21 project even though they have not yet tested for L-21.

About the Italian R-L21 I am still waiting that Rich shows them to me. Argiedude is linked to a Calloway family and I hadn't any reply to my request of deeper tests.

Last I checked, argiedude had NO close matches. Saying he is "linked to a Calloway family"is one thing, proving it is another. As I recall, at one point you were saying his closest match was a Richter (or something like that) from Germany, but that "match" wasn't close either.

I think that all these persons have a common ancestor 10 generations ago. I use 32 years for generation, then about 320 years ago, or, better, 320 years before the last generation tested.

This person likely had these values:13,24,14,11,11-14,12,11,11,13,14,29,17,9-9,11,11,25,15,29,15-15-15-17.

All these persons are obviously related, but I do not think the common ancestor is within the last 300-400 years. There are no known family relationships or close geographic ties (no easily identifiable common names or towns) within the last 200 or so years. I would think an ancestor would be at least as old as Klyosov's 1350 date.

The more relevant concern is how to reconcile that some of the cluster has a known SNP and known Levite status, and that parts of the cluster that do not have that SNP have no known Levite tradition. In Eastern European Jewish tradition, Levite status is paternal hereditary, abides by halakhic (legal) concerns, is not easily lost or forgotten, nor is it created out of mere desire (I will leave aside Khazar R1a issues, they are not relevant to R-L21 discussion).

The newly uncovered L583 SNP and Levite split within the cluster is clearly important, and should be taken into consideration along with STR mutation calculations to make sense of how old a common ancestor would be. Leaving out NPEs (always a possibility, I would think that Levite tradition within the last 1000 years is probably as reliable as a SNP.

I have no problem to explain all this by an introgression in the Jewish pool. Perhaps you know that for supporting this I had two banishments from Rootsweb and from “forums-dna”, and the case isn’t unique: as I have said before, there are many similar cases: G2c, my R1b1a2a and also R1b1a2 of my cousin very close to many Ashkanazic Jews, many mtDNA, like the same K1a1b1a which descends from my “Tuscan” K1a1b1, and many others.The true problem for me is the fact that this haplotype has many mutations which differentiated it from all the other R-L21-s. For this I haven’t excluded before that it is Jewish from so long, even from before the Diaspora. But why no other Jews is linked with this haplotype except these closely related persons?We can think to a bottleneck, from where only a few persons survived, but this can be worth also for the other European peoples.This is the true mystery, I think, of this case.About Klyosov, had he really calculated a MRCA for these persons to 1350 years ago? Then I don’t understand how he dilates and restricts the times as he likes.

About Klyosov, had he really calculated a MRCA for these persons to 1350 years ago? Then I don’t understand how he dilates and restricts the times as he likes.

No, not 1350 years ago. It is 1350 C.E. when the Bubonic Plague hit Europe and there was eastward push into Poland and Lithuania by Jews who survived the plague and subsequent pogroms. This was a bottleneck (as was WWII). If there were more L21 Jews around to test, there would probably be more variation within the haplotype.

I still need to better understand Levite and non-Levite differentiation. Maybe there was introgression a thousand years ago (some have proposed this was to get admitted to the Narbonne Talmudic Academy), but then where are the non-Jews that would share the haplotype. I just don't see any. Strange that they don't show up. All my matches are Jewish and conform closely to Baltic Cluster haplotype(s).

Yes, the true question is “but then where are the non-Jews that would share the haplotype”? Not only the Jews (that there aren’t) of course. This is the mystery, and it is the same with the other haplogroups and haplotypes I cited before. The same for K1a1b1a, which has at least 3 mutations respect my K1a1b1. I solved this problem saying that Ashkenazi Jews descend from about 25,000 persons that migrated from Italy to the Rhine Valley probably before 1000 AD, and they became 10,000,000 before the WWII, then so many meioses and so many mutations. That this could be an explanation, also for the other haplogroups (Y and mt), could be demonstrated by the fact that R-L21 is typically Western European, if the same Italy lacks completely of it, beyond what Rich thinks.Re: Klyosov I could say that my calculation isn’t on average, but pretends to be exact, and if I say 10 is 10 and not 20. Also in the first half of 17th century there was the Thirty Years War and the population of Germany was decimated. Alsace was peopled by Tyroleans like my friend Gabennesch, who is an E1b1a8, an African living in the Alps, even though he has now two SNPs not present in Africa, and my theory that he and his linked persons are here from thousands of years becomes likely. Hope you find these SNPs too.